MKB (Asia) P. Ltd. v. CIT

294 ITR 655Income Tax Appellate Tribunal#8257 most cited
14

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2024.

Also reported as

82 TTJ 652

Sections most often in play

Section 115BBESection 131Section 132(1)Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 145Section 69A

Judgments citing MKB (Asia) P. Ltd. v. CIT

ANIL BHUTANI,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, NOIDA

In the result, the substantial question of law is answered in favour of the appellant and against the revenue

ITA 430/DEL/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI G. S. PANNU (Vice President), SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA (Judicial Member)

Section 131Section 132(1)Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 69ASection 69C

…ropriate to reproduce the relevant part of the order as follows; “It is found that the in the bottom of the paragraph 14 of the order dated 16/02/2023 the relevant paragraph of the judgment of Hon’ble Gauhati High Court in jthe case of MKB (Asia) P. Ltd. CIT 294 ITR 655 which has been relied by the Bench has been omitted in the final order. Therefore, rectifying the same, the following portion is added at the bottom of Paragraph 14 of the order dated 16/02/2023. “6. The Revenue, thereafter, took the matter to the Income-tax Appellant Tribunal who set aside the order of the appellate authority and restored the or…

PREM BHUTANI,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, NOIDA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 429/DEL/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Feb 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139Section 142(1)Section 28Section 32Section 34Section 69A

…ld have chosen to follow cash system of accounting. There is no evidence on record to show that such purported profit was received by the assessee, much less during the year under appeal. Hon’ble Gauhati High Court in the case of MKB (Asia) P. Ltd. vs. CIT 294 ITR 655 have held that income tax authority has no option or jurisdiction to either direct the assessee to maintain its accounts in particular manner and the assessee has the option to adopt any recognized method of accounting for his business and income in that case is required to be computed in accordance with such system of accounting. The relevant…

M/S. PIYUSH BUILDWELL INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, FARIDABAD

The appeal of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 2067/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Oct 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishim/S. Piyush Colonizers Limited, Vs. Acit, A-16/B-1, Mohan Co-Op. Central Circle-I, Industrial Estate, Main Mathura Faridabad Road, New Delhi Pan: Aadcp7023J (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. M/S. Piyush Colonizers Central Circle-I, Limited, Faridabad A-16/B-1, Mohan Co-Op Industrial Estate, Main Mathura Road, New Delhi Pan: Aadcp7023J (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt Sulekha Verma, CIT DR

…to by the AR duly support the case of the appellant. a. Indian Oiltanking Ltd. V/s TTO, Mumbai 120 TTJ 61 (Mum-Trib) b. Dy. CIT V/s Conwood Agencies Pvt. Ltd. 2 SOT 573 (Mum) c. MKB (Asia) (P) Ltd. V/s CIT 167 Taxman 256 (Gau) d. DCIT V/s IT C Hotels Ltd. 82 TTJ 652 (Ban-Trib) On a perusal of facts of present case and the above judgments, I find that books of accounts in the appellant case are duly audited and there is no qualification made by the Chartered Accountant. The change in accounting policy for recognizing the revenue is duly disclosed. There is no change in the method of accounting followed by the…

ACIT, FARIDABAD vs. M/S PIYUSH COLONIZERS LTD., NEW DELHI

The appeal of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1972/DEL/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Oct 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishim/S. Piyush Colonizers Limited, Vs. Acit, A-16/B-1, Mohan Co-Op. Central Circle-I, Industrial Estate, Main Mathura Faridabad Road, New Delhi Pan: Aadcp7023J (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. M/S. Piyush Colonizers Central Circle-I, Limited, Faridabad A-16/B-1, Mohan Co-Op Industrial Estate, Main Mathura Road, New Delhi Pan: Aadcp7023J (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt Sulekha Verma, CIT DR

…to by the AR duly support the case of the appellant. a. Indian Oiltanking Ltd. V/s TTO, Mumbai 120 TTJ 61 (Mum-Trib) b. Dy. CIT V/s Conwood Agencies Pvt. Ltd. 2 SOT 573 (Mum) c. MKB (Asia) (P) Ltd. V/s CIT 167 Taxman 256 (Gau) d. DCIT V/s IT C Hotels Ltd. 82 TTJ 652 (Ban-Trib) On a perusal of facts of present case and the above judgments, I find that books of accounts in the appellant case are duly audited and there is no qualification made by the Chartered Accountant. The change in accounting policy for recognizing the revenue is duly disclosed. There is no change in the method of accounting followed by the…

ACIT, FARIDABAD vs. M/S PIYUSH BUILDWELL (INDIA) LTD., NEW DELHI

The appeal of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1971/DEL/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Oct 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishim/S. Piyush Colonizers Limited, Vs. Acit, A-16/B-1, Mohan Co-Op. Central Circle-I, Industrial Estate, Main Mathura Faridabad Road, New Delhi Pan: Aadcp7023J (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. M/S. Piyush Colonizers Central Circle-I, Limited, Faridabad A-16/B-1, Mohan Co-Op Industrial Estate, Main Mathura Road, New Delhi Pan: Aadcp7023J (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt Sulekha Verma, CIT DR

…to by the AR duly support the case of the appellant. a. Indian Oiltanking Ltd. V/s TTO, Mumbai 120 TTJ 61 (Mum-Trib) b. Dy. CIT V/s Conwood Agencies Pvt. Ltd. 2 SOT 573 (Mum) c. MKB (Asia) (P) Ltd. V/s CIT 167 Taxman 256 (Gau) d. DCIT V/s IT C Hotels Ltd. 82 TTJ 652 (Ban-Trib) On a perusal of facts of present case and the above judgments, I find that books of accounts in the appellant case are duly audited and there is no qualification made by the Chartered Accountant. The change in accounting policy for recognizing the revenue is duly disclosed. There is no change in the method of accounting followed by the…

M/S PIYUSH COLONIZERS LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, FARIDABAD

The appeal of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1644/DEL/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Oct 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishim/S. Piyush Colonizers Limited, Vs. Acit, A-16/B-1, Mohan Co-Op. Central Circle-I, Industrial Estate, Main Mathura Faridabad Road, New Delhi Pan: Aadcp7023J (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. M/S. Piyush Colonizers Central Circle-I, Limited, Faridabad A-16/B-1, Mohan Co-Op Industrial Estate, Main Mathura Road, New Delhi Pan: Aadcp7023J (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt Sulekha Verma, CIT DR

…to by the AR duly support the case of the appellant. a. Indian Oiltanking Ltd. V/s TTO, Mumbai 120 TTJ 61 (Mum-Trib) b. Dy. CIT V/s Conwood Agencies Pvt. Ltd. 2 SOT 573 (Mum) c. MKB (Asia) (P) Ltd. V/s CIT 167 Taxman 256 (Gau) d. DCIT V/s IT C Hotels Ltd. 82 TTJ 652 (Ban-Trib) On a perusal of facts of present case and the above judgments, I find that books of accounts in the appellant case are duly audited and there is no qualification made by the Chartered Accountant. The change in accounting policy for recognizing the revenue is duly disclosed. There is no change in the method of accounting followed by the…

M/S. MEHTA CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee i

ITA 6724/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N. K. Billaiya & Sh. Narendra Chodhary

For Appellant: Mrs. Ranojain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Ashima Neb, Sr. DR
Section 143

…essee by upholding as under :- “I have carefully considered the facts of the case, the important aspects which immerge from the present appeal are :- 1. The Method of accounting has been accepted for several years on same set of facts. Reliance is placed on 294 ITR 655 (Gauhati) MKB (Asia) P. Ltd. V. Commissioner of Income- Tax. 2. Non maintenance of stock register cannot be a ground for rejection of account in every case it depends upon the nature of business. 324 ITR 95 (Delhi) Commissioner of Income-Tax v. Jas Jack Elegance Exports 192 Taxman 167 (Delhi) & Commissioner of Income – Tax XII v. Poonam Rani. 3.T…

M/S MEHTA CONSTRUCTION COMPANY,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee i

ITA 6857/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Oct 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N. K. Billaiya & Sh. Narendra Chodhary

For Appellant: Mrs. Ranojain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Ashima Neb, Sr. DR
Section 143

…essee by upholding as under :- “I have carefully considered the facts of the case, the important aspects which immerge from the present appeal are :- 1. The Method of accounting has been accepted for several years on same set of facts. Reliance is placed on 294 ITR 655 (Gauhati) MKB (Asia) P. Ltd. V. Commissioner of Income- Tax. 2. Non maintenance of stock register cannot be a ground for rejection of account in every case it depends upon the nature of business. 324 ITR 95 (Delhi) Commissioner of Income-Tax v. Jas Jack Elegance Exports 192 Taxman 167 (Delhi) & Commissioner of Income – Tax XII v. Poonam Rani. 3.T…

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX-21, vs. M/S MEHTA CONSTRUCTION CO.

The appeals are partly allowed in the above terms

ITA/314/2016HC Delhi08 Feb 2018

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

Section 145

…and 2008- 09 held as follows: “I have carefully considered the facts of the case, the important aspects which immerge from the present appeal are- 1. The Method of accounting has been accepted for several years on same set of facts. Reliance is placed on 294 ITR 655: [Gauhati] MKB [Asia) P. Ltd, v. Commissioner of Income-Tax 2. Non maintenance of stock register cannot be a ground for rejection of account in every case it depends upon the nature of business. 324 ITR 95 (Delhi) Commissioner of Income-Tax v. Jas Jack Elegance Exports 192 Taxman 167 (Delhi) & Commissioner of Income-Tax- XII v. Poonam Ran…

ACIT 25(3), MUMBAI vs. PUNIT CONSTRUCTION CO., MUMBAI

ITA 228/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jul 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: S/Sh. Rajendra & Pawan Singhआयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A./228/Mum/2014, िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year:2010-11 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Acit-25(3) M/S. Punit Construction Co. Agarwal Residency, Shankar Lane, 308, C-11, Bandra-Kurla Complex Vs. Kandivali (W),Mumbai-67. Bandra (E),Mumbai-400 051. Pan:Aaafp 1231 E (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Revenue By: Shri M. Dayasagar-Dr Assessee By: Dr. K.Shivram-Ar सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 29.06.2016 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement:27.07.2016 आयकर आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम,1961 क" क" धारा धारा 254(1)केकेकेके अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश देश आयकर आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम क" क" धारा धारा अ"तग"त अ"तग"त देश देश Order U/S.254(1)Of The Income-Tax Act,1961(Act) लेखा लेखा सद"य लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य राजे"" सद"य राजे"" राजे"" केकेकेके अनुसार राजे"" अनुसार अनुसार Per Rajendra, Am- अनुसार Challenging The Order Dated 11.10. 2013 Of Cit(A)-35,Mumbai The Assessing Officer (Ao) Has Filed The Present Appeal.Assessee-Firm Is Engaged In Business As Builder & Developer.It Filed Its Return Of Income On 19.9.2010,Declaring Total Income At Rs.33.91 Lakhs.The Ao Completed The Assessment On 7.3.2013,U/S. 143(3) Of The Act,Determining The Income Of The Assessee At Rs.19.21 Crores.

For Appellant: Dr. K.Shivram-ARFor Respondent: Shri M. Dayasagar-DR
Section 143(3)Section 254(1)

…s of sale of flats the profit could not be determined, that it was not the case of the AO that the assessee had no intention to complete the project, that it had claimed that the project was over in the next AY.The FAA referred to the cases of MKV Asia P.Ltd (294 ITR 655),Realest Builders and Services Ltd. (307 ITR 202)and Sanjeev Woolen Mills (274 ITR 434)and held that there were no different facts in the current year as compared to earlier years,that there was no justification to disturb the accepted principles of accounting followed by assessee since AY.2002-03 for the same project, that the system of accounti…

M/S. MEHTA CONSTRUCTION CO.,NEW DELHI vs. JCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result the appeals filed by the assessee i

ITA 474/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Oct 2015AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2007-08 Mehta Construction Co., Vs. Income Tax Officer, R-695, 2Nd Floor, New Ward-38(2), New Delhi Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi (Pan: Aahfm3503D) (Appellant) (Respondent) & Assessment Year: 2010-11 Mehta Construction Co., Vs. Jcit, Circle-62(1), R-695, 2Nd Floor, New Civic Centre, New Delhi Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi (Pan: Aahfm3503D) (Appellant) (Respondent) & Ita Nos. 2561 & 4366/Del/2012 Assessment Years: 2008-09 & 2009-10 Acit, Circle-38(1), Vs. Mehta Construction Co., New Delhi R-695, Iind Floor, Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi (Pan: Aahfm3503D) Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Sh. Narender Chillar, Adv. Department By : Sh. P. Dam Kanunjna, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 06.10.2015 Date Of Pronouncement: 16.10.2015 Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, A.M.: These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee-Company As Well As By The Revenue. The Appeals In Ita Nos. 3967/Del/2010 For A.Y. 2007-08 & 474/Del/2015 For A.Y. 2010-11 Are Filed By The Assessee Company. The Appeals

For Appellant: Sh. Narender Chillar, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. P. Dam Kanunjna, Sr. DR
Section 145Section 145(3)

…the assessee by holding as under: “I have carefully considered the facts of the case, the important aspects which immerge from the present appeal are:- 1. The Method of accounting has been accepted for several years on same set of facts. Reliance is placed on 294 ITR 655 (Gauhati) MKB (Asia) P . Ltd, v. Commissioner of Income-Tax 2. Non maintenance of stock register cannot be a ground for rejection of account in every case it depends upon the nature of business. 324 ITR 95 (Delhi) Commissioner of Income-Tax v. Jas Jack Elegance Exports 192 Taxman 167 (Delhi) & Commissioner of Income-Tax- XII v. Poonam Rani. 3. Th…

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S MEHTA CONSTRUCTION CO., NEW DELHI

In the result the appeals filed by the assessee i

ITA 4366/DEL/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Oct 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2007-08 Mehta Construction Co., Vs. Income Tax Officer, R-695, 2Nd Floor, New Ward-38(2), New Delhi Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi (Pan: Aahfm3503D) (Appellant) (Respondent) & Assessment Year: 2010-11 Mehta Construction Co., Vs. Jcit, Circle-62(1), R-695, 2Nd Floor, New Civic Centre, New Delhi Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi (Pan: Aahfm3503D) (Appellant) (Respondent) & Ita Nos. 2561 & 4366/Del/2012 Assessment Years: 2008-09 & 2009-10 Acit, Circle-38(1), Vs. Mehta Construction Co., New Delhi R-695, Iind Floor, Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi (Pan: Aahfm3503D) Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Sh. Narender Chillar, Adv. Department By : Sh. P. Dam Kanunjna, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 06.10.2015 Date Of Pronouncement: 16.10.2015 Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, A.M.: These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee-Company As Well As By The Revenue. The Appeals In Ita Nos. 3967/Del/2010 For A.Y. 2007-08 & 474/Del/2015 For A.Y. 2010-11 Are Filed By The Assessee Company. The Appeals

For Appellant: Sh. Narender Chillar, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. P. Dam Kanunjna, Sr. DR
Section 145Section 145(3)

…the assessee by holding as under: “I have carefully considered the facts of the case, the important aspects which immerge from the present appeal are:- 1. The Method of accounting has been accepted for several years on same set of facts. Reliance is placed on 294 ITR 655 (Gauhati) MKB (Asia) P . Ltd, v. Commissioner of Income-Tax 2. Non maintenance of stock register cannot be a ground for rejection of account in every case it depends upon the nature of business. 324 ITR 95 (Delhi) Commissioner of Income-Tax v. Jas Jack Elegance Exports 192 Taxman 167 (Delhi) & Commissioner of Income-Tax- XII v. Poonam Rani. 3. Th…

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. MEHTA CONSTRUCTION CO., NEW DELHI

In the result the appeals filed by the assessee i

ITA 2561/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Oct 2015AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2007-08 Mehta Construction Co., Vs. Income Tax Officer, R-695, 2Nd Floor, New Ward-38(2), New Delhi Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi (Pan: Aahfm3503D) (Appellant) (Respondent) & Assessment Year: 2010-11 Mehta Construction Co., Vs. Jcit, Circle-62(1), R-695, 2Nd Floor, New Civic Centre, New Delhi Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi (Pan: Aahfm3503D) (Appellant) (Respondent) & Ita Nos. 2561 & 4366/Del/2012 Assessment Years: 2008-09 & 2009-10 Acit, Circle-38(1), Vs. Mehta Construction Co., New Delhi R-695, Iind Floor, Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi (Pan: Aahfm3503D) Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Sh. Narender Chillar, Adv. Department By : Sh. P. Dam Kanunjna, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 06.10.2015 Date Of Pronouncement: 16.10.2015 Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, A.M.: These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee-Company As Well As By The Revenue. The Appeals In Ita Nos. 3967/Del/2010 For A.Y. 2007-08 & 474/Del/2015 For A.Y. 2010-11 Are Filed By The Assessee Company. The Appeals

For Appellant: Sh. Narender Chillar, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. P. Dam Kanunjna, Sr. DR
Section 145Section 145(3)

…the assessee by holding as under: “I have carefully considered the facts of the case, the important aspects which immerge from the present appeal are:- 1. The Method of accounting has been accepted for several years on same set of facts. Reliance is placed on 294 ITR 655 (Gauhati) MKB (Asia) P . Ltd, v. Commissioner of Income-Tax 2. Non maintenance of stock register cannot be a ground for rejection of account in every case it depends upon the nature of business. 324 ITR 95 (Delhi) Commissioner of Income-Tax v. Jas Jack Elegance Exports 192 Taxman 167 (Delhi) & Commissioner of Income-Tax- XII v. Poonam Rani. 3. Th…

M/S. MEHTA CONSTRUCTION CO.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

In the result the appeals filed by the assessee i

ITA 3967/DEL/2010[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Oct 2015AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2007-08 Mehta Construction Co., Vs. Income Tax Officer, R-695, 2Nd Floor, New Ward-38(2), New Delhi Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi (Pan: Aahfm3503D) (Appellant) (Respondent) & Assessment Year: 2010-11 Mehta Construction Co., Vs. Jcit, Circle-62(1), R-695, 2Nd Floor, New Civic Centre, New Delhi Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi (Pan: Aahfm3503D) (Appellant) (Respondent) & Ita Nos. 2561 & 4366/Del/2012 Assessment Years: 2008-09 & 2009-10 Acit, Circle-38(1), Vs. Mehta Construction Co., New Delhi R-695, Iind Floor, Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi (Pan: Aahfm3503D) Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Sh. Narender Chillar, Adv. Department By : Sh. P. Dam Kanunjna, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 06.10.2015 Date Of Pronouncement: 16.10.2015 Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, A.M.: These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee-Company As Well As By The Revenue. The Appeals In Ita Nos. 3967/Del/2010 For A.Y. 2007-08 & 474/Del/2015 For A.Y. 2010-11 Are Filed By The Assessee Company. The Appeals

For Appellant: Sh. Narender Chillar, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. P. Dam Kanunjna, Sr. DR
Section 145Section 145(3)

…the assessee by holding as under: “I have carefully considered the facts of the case, the important aspects which immerge from the present appeal are:- 1. The Method of accounting has been accepted for several years on same set of facts. Reliance is placed on 294 ITR 655 (Gauhati) MKB (Asia) P . Ltd, v. Commissioner of Income-Tax 2. Non maintenance of stock register cannot be a ground for rejection of account in every case it depends upon the nature of business. 324 ITR 95 (Delhi) Commissioner of Income-Tax v. Jas Jack Elegance Exports 192 Taxman 167 (Delhi) & Commissioner of Income-Tax- XII v. Poonam Rani. 3. Th…